ANDY MARTIN: The 2010 election is 1966 all over again
Political analyst Andy Martin explains why 2010 is not the 1994 election year. Rather, Martin suggests that 2010 is going to prove more analogous to 1966. And 2011? Fasten your seat belts: 1979 is coming back for another go-around. Like Jimmy Carter in 1979, Barack Obama is about to be tested. And tested hard. By America’s enemies. And especially by our “frenemies.”
Internet Powerhouse Andy Martin says “Wait till next year; Obama’s problems are just beginning”
Martin says the old Viet-Nam era refrain “The whole world is watching” may come back to bite ObamaContrarianCommentary.com
“The Internet Powerhouse”
“Factually Correct, Not Politically Correct”
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
ANDY MARTIN SAYS PREDICTS THAT A REPUBLICAN CONGRESS WILL BE THE LEAST OF BARACK OBAMA’S WORRIES IN 2011
MARTIN LOOKS AHEAD TO WHAT AMERICANS CAN EXPECT IN 2011; THE PICTURE IS NOT PRETTY
ANDY MARTIN, AMERICAN’S MOST INFLUENTIAL OPINION WRITER AND BARACK OBAMA’S FORMIDABLE INTERNET OPPONENT FOR THE PAST SIX YEARS, SAYS OBAMA HAS A LOT OF CHICKENS COMING HOME TO ROOST (NOW WHERE DID WE HEAR THAT BEFORE?)
ANDY PREDICTS WE ARE HEADING FOR 1966, AND THEN STRAIGHT ON TO 1979
(Note: during the days leading up to the election look for us to be everywhere. But don’t be confused. First, we are still committed to defeating Mark Kirk in Illinois; we have been working on an “undercover” story on Kirk for release next week. Second, we are following the overall national political situation. Finally, we will be doing what we do best: predicting the future by making informed assessments and assumptions about where our politics and foreign policy are headed in 2011.)
(NEW YORK)(October 22, 2010) Barack Obama’s former spiritual director, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, became notorious for predicting that “America’s chickens were coming home to roost.” Well, the chickens may be heading for the Obama White House in 2011. And that’s not chicken feed.
At a time when ordinary media are completely focused on Election Day, we would like to introduce a long-term analysis of where the 2010 election will be leading us in 2011.
Cable TV bobbleheads probably feel that Washington will be returning to “business as usual” on November 3rd.
The Capitol will have to absorb many new conservative legislators. Gridlock will be in season. And Bumbling Barry Obama will, well, bumble through. e may think that iHe may think that if he’s lucky he can “triangulate” against Republican opposition and get reelected as president in 2012. It ain’t happening.
As my readers know, I am both a political analyst and political activist. So I look at matters from both sides of the lens. And while I accidentally became best known as the writer who first exposed Barack Obama as a poseur, my original specialty was and continues to be military, intelligence and foreign policy analysis.
I worked in Washington in 1966, on Capitol Hill, and in close proximity to the White House. I saw the 89th Congress dissolve into the chaos of the late 1960’s.
Most writers have tried to say that 2010 is “another 1994.” Not really. Although power changed hands in 1994 the direction of the country changed only minimally. President Bill Clinton managed to rope-a-dope the Republicans into reelection, and the tension between the White House and Capitol Hill created a hydraulic balance. 2010 is not going to be 1994.
Rather, 2010 is gong to be 1966, all over again. Only bigger and more dangerous. In January, 1966, no one in Washington had any inkling that the Democratic Party and the Great Society were about to be dismembered. The 89th Congress continued to legislate.
Amazingly, The American public felt the tremors of Viet-Nam before the Washingtonians did. Perhaps that is because casualties began to mount rapidly, and the draft began to suck more and more Americans into the growing Indochina war.
My senator, Senator Paul Douglas, knew as early as August 1966 that things were not going well for him. Because I was the low man in the office (below now-billionaire businessman Ron Gidwitz) I got to drive the senator around Washington. The senator and I spent a lot of time alone talking politics, talking the future, talking about the ups and downs of life. Douglas had seen World War I, survived the Depression, and been grievously wounded and crippled in World War II. He was one of the first “Cold warriors.” Douglas sensed the coming tsunami before the media did.
The 1966 election changed the fundamental direction of the United States for a generation. The Republican Party, which had been declared “dead” only two years earlier in 1964 (sound familiar?), roared back and erased the Democratic gains of 1964 in 1966. 1966 led to 1968, and 1968 led to the upheavals that are only now being felt with full force in American government.
Unlike Bill Clinton, Barack Obama was not a Viet-Nam era candidate, despite Obama’s Zelig-like claims to have been everywhere and involved in everything. But today, this nation is still run predominantly by Viet-Nam era individuals.
And so, my first prediction: this election is a “1966” turning point, a far stronger change in direction than 1994. (So far as I am aware, only George Will has recognized the 1966 parallel.)
1966 led to 1968, and 1968 led to? Watergate. What did Watergate lead to? Foreign policy disasters that are still bedeviling Americans. Watergate led to President Jimmy Carter. And Jimmy Carter led to? Chaos. While some may unwittingly connect Carter’s haplessness to Obama’s, they have not yet seen the real connection between the two men and the gathering storm abroad.
Ironically, Jimmy Carter was a lot like George Bush. Both men are decent and honorable. But both men were naïve in the ways of the world, and both men led American into foreign policy disasters. In the case of Carter, the nation was saved by the emergence of President Ronald Reagan. Who will save us in 2012? No one has appeared on the horizon that manifests the manifest destiny of Reagan.
So why is 2011 going to be a replay of 1979? The 1978 election saw Republican gains. Jimmy Carter was exposed as a weak leader. Then 1979 exploded. The supposedly-invincible “Pahlavi Dynasty” was toppled in Iran, after Carter abandoned the Shah. We began what has morphed into four decades of Islamic fundamentalism. Seeing Carter helpless and befuddled, the Russians then moved into Afghanistan and started the First Afghan War. I first went to Iran in 1979, and to Afghanistan in 1980. I saw the gathering storm up close.
Carter’s inability to deal with international chaos elected Reagan. That is why if Obama thinks that he can pull a 1996 Clinton-style reelection he is mistaken. Now you know why I believe 2010 is 1966, and why 2011 is inexorably going to become a replay of 1979.
The evidence that America is endangered is out there in the open. But no one is paying attention. At least most Americans are not paying attention. Attention must be paid. Activists are focused on reelecting Democrats and electing Republicans. But Republican legislators will be as helpless to deal with international chaos as the Usurper-in-Chief.
The desperation of 2011 may create conditions for another radical change: Democrats will likely panic and dump Obama. Barry O may think he has a fair chance at being reelected. I think he should do what he does best: leave office and resume being the greatest entertainer in the world. His term as a “leader” is coming to an early end. I won’t predict Hillary Clinton will be the 2012 presidential candidate; but her reemergence would not surprise me. Democrats will not make the same mistake in 2012 they made in 1980.
So why am I so pessimistic? What do I see out there? What will you be seeing next year?
1. Iraq. Obama took credit for the “peace” in Iraq. But there is no peace. The United States pulled out, but left behind 50,000 American hostages to Iraq’s very possible collapse into chaos. With the American leadership gone, Sunnis are once again gravitating away from Baghdad into the resistance.
Prime Minister Al-Maliki’s recent trip to the holy city of Qum (a city that I became familiar with during the 1979 Iran hostage crisis) is a sign that he is pandering to the most anti-American elements in the region. Al-Maliki may not have yet emerged as an anti-American leader. But the possibility that he could become hostile to the 50,000 Americans left in Iraq is not impossible or even unlikely.
Almost eight months after the March election in Iraq, there is still no government. It looks increasingly as though the regime that will emerge will not be a friendly one.
What will Obama do when American forces In Iraq come under attack? If he stays to fight, a new war begins. If he cuts and runs, he tumbles into the dustbin of history even sooner than anyone expects. Iraq is a time bomb waiting to explode.
2. Iran. Iran is a genuine threat. But I disagree with our Iranian policies. In reality, the Iranian regime’s best friends are Republican Party politicians like Mark Kirk who are constantly beating the drums for “sanctions” against Iran. Sanctions are a dream-come-true for the Persian regime.
Mr. Ahmadinejad is becoming increasingly bold, and increasingly welcome throughout the Middle East. Ahmadinejad’s recent reception in Lebanon was a wake-up call to the snoozing White House.
So what about Iran? On the one hand, Iran is not going to launch a war. Because of the anti-Iranian vitriol in our politics we ignore the fact that although the United States reacted to the hostage crisis by invading Iran, using our then-proxy in Baghdad Saddam Hussein, Iran is seeking regional hegemony, not territorial expansion. If Iran starts a war, which I doubt, it will be a failure for their regime, not a success.
3. Israel. Israel presents two possible risks. First, the failed “peace process” may embolden the Israelis to crack down on Palestinians. On the other hand, Palestinians and the world community are clearly inching closer to the Andy Martin Peace Plan which I put forward in 2000: Recognition first, negotiation second. Netanyahu may think that he can make a power grab while Obama is politically weak. Ironically, I think this may be the one area where Obama can strike back. And will.
More dangerously, Israeli generals may think that they can launch an attack on Iran while Obama is distracted. Israel cannot win a war against Iran. But a lot of Israelis think they can. Israeli overconfidence could trigger a suicide mission. Unfortunately, if Israel commits national suicide, we get dragged in.
4. Afghanistan-Pakistan. Afghanistan is a mess. The Karzai regime is a joke. Here at home, patience is wearing thin with the endless, even though endless war on a reduced level may be preferable to endless chaos and unending risk to our global interests. Pakistan is a failed state with nuclear weapons. The area is a disaster zone. Need I say more?
5. China? China would seem to be our greatest foreign policy worry. But in light of the crazies in the Middle East, the threats posed by China will pale by comparison. At least the Chinese are rational, if only barely so.
Still China is preparing to confront Obama in 2011. He is not up to that challenge. I expect we will see the same ruinous Chinese export policies, trying to drive the American people into peonage. But Americans are waking up. They are sick of kowtowing to Chinese imperialists. But while public opinion may support a confrontation with China, Obama is not the man to do the job. It will have to wait for the next president. In the meantime, the Chinese will be seeking to undermine us at every opportunity. China is a disaster waiting to happen. A military threat is inevitable.
You know things are going to be bad in 2011 when I list the Chinese as one of our lesser problems; China is a mega-problem for the United States. The time for playing “pretend” with China is over.
The foregoing problems are just “for starters.” We have a scary list without adding anything new or currently invisible.
Will the Republicans be any better at dealing with the chaos of 2011 than the Democrats? Strangely no. Foreign policy is uniquely one area where only a president can lead, and must lead decisively. Obama is not the man for the job.
My mom and dad were products of World War II. As I was growing up, while other parents exposed their kids to baseball I was exposed to the Holocaust, to World War II, to Korea, and to the Middle East.
During my adult life, whether I was in Viet-Nam or Hong Kong, Baghdad or Tehran, Cairo or Riyadh, I worked to develop an independent network of international sources. Anyone who followed my reporting from “My Year in Baghdad” knows I can point an antenna in the right direction. Based on a lifetime of foreign experience, 2011 scares me.
Baseball fans like to say, “Wait until next year.” And we began these observations with the old Vietnam refrain, “The Whole World is Watching.” I do not think Barack Obama and his “crew” of Chicago cronies are up to the job. Barack Obama, not our enemies, is the greatest threat to our national security. Who will emerge as the strong leader to replace him in 2012? Right now, I don’t have a clue.
If you would like to see some of my foreign policy views and match them up with subsequent developments, take a look at:
ABOUT ANDY: Chicago Public Radio calls Andy Martin a “boisterous Internet activist.” Andy is the legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. He has over forty years of background in radio and television and is the dean of Illinois media and communications. He promotes his best-selling book, “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” and his Internet movie "Obama: The Hawai'i years." Martin has been a leading corruption fighter in Illinois for over forty years. He is currently sponsoring www.AmericaisReadyforReform.com
Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of the “Internet Powerhouse,” http://www.contrariancommentary.com/
. He comments on regional, national and world events with decades of investigative and analytical experience. He has over forty years of familiarity with Asia and the Middle East; he is regarded overseas as one of America’s most respected independent foreign policy, military and intelligence analysts.
He holds a Juris Doctor degree from the University of Illinois College of Law and is a former adjunct professor of law at the City University of New York (LaGuardia CC, Bronx CC).
UPDATES: www.twitter.com/AndyMartinUSAwww.facebook.com/AndyMartin Andy's columns are also posted at ContrarianCommentary.blogspot.com; contrariancommentary.wordpress.com.
contrariancommentary.typepad.com[NOTE: We try to correct any typographical errors in this story on our blogs; find our latest edition there.]
MEDIA CONTACT: (866) 706-2639 or CELL (917) 664-9329E-MAIL: AndyMart20@aol.com © Copyright by Andy Martin 2010
Labels: 1966, 1979, 1994, Andy Martin, Iran, Iraq, Republican congress